Tuesday, March 27, 2007

ELCCA Report QC Checklist

Topic: A quality-control checklist for the ELCCA report, sampled from comments of the ELCCA reviewers

  • Preface
    • Verify date, client, analysts name and job number on title page
  • Section 1 Executive Summary
    • The executive summary should include a description of the overall project and how the building will be operated; refer page 41 to 2005 ELCCA guidelines. This should be covered by formula linking Paragraph A.1 & A.2 to Section 2; if not, then you're using an old template. Update from master template.
    • Verify signature from architect and engineer have been obtained on the "Statement of Compliance" page; forward PDF copy of report if requested.
    • Verify signed and dated professional engineers stamp at the lower right hand corner of the "Statement of Compliance" page.
    • Verify there are no #VALUE! errors appearing in any calculations
  • Section 1 PFEC
    • Verify that the correct alternative has been selected
    • Verify all "blue" input statements, and assure that they the agree with the selected alternative.
    • Verify that the U-values calculated in Section 4 match the U-values shown on the PFEC.
  • Section 6 High Performance Alternative
    • Verify that the High-Performance Alternative has been compared to an ASHRAE 90.1-2004 Appendix G compliant baseline using packaged rooftop units, without "rotation averaging" or "glazing leveling", for purposes of energy goal comparison. If this baseline is not one of the standard alternates analyzed, then include an eQuest "Annual Utility Bills" report at the end of this section comparing this baseline to the best-performing parametric runs of the other simulations:
(click on the image to see a larger version)
  • LCC, Estimate, & Maintenance Calcs
    • Verify there are no #VALUE! errors in any calculations
  • Appendices
    • Verify contents of the PDF appendices; ensure that all sections have been exchanged from the template.
  • Appendix A
    • Verifying that all comments on the workplan have been addressed. Be sure that any supporting simulation reports required by the comments have been included in Appendix C (e.g. envelope alternatives, daylighting, etc.).
  • Appendix A thru E:
    • Verify that there are NO pages in the appendix which are carried over from an old job.
  • Preprinting Final Check
    • Do a keyword search on the name of the facility, city, architect and owner from which the template was copied; assure that all pages containing references to the previous facility, city, architect and owner have been exchanged.
      • Note this doesn't mean 'do a search and replace'.
      • Finding previous references indicates that pages in the PDF report document need to be replaced with output pages from the analysis.
      • Perhaps an entire section or appendix was overlooked; skipping this step risks finding out from the owner, architect or reviewer after publication.
    • Working from front to back and utilizing the PDF bookmarks, verify that all major sections (Table of Contents, 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 etc.) and lead sheet of each appendix begins on odd pages. Insert or delete an 8.5x11 or 11x17 "This Page Intentionally Left Blank" sheet as required.
  • Source Spreadsheet
    • QC checks for the authors only
    • Click the 'Reset All Page Numbers' button to ensure proper page numbering prior to printing replacement pages.
    • Note the integer value in the cell in the PFEC spreadsheet to the right of the EUI number. If it needs to be changed, reprint both the PFEC and Section 1.

Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Ground & Water Source Heat Pumps

Topic: Performance parameters of ground and water source heat pumps (@ about 1400 CFM & 8 GPM)

The table below is useful for evaluating the lifecycle costs of ground and water source heat pumps with relative efficiency ratings of "standard", "high" and "ultrahigh":


ReferenceStandardHighUltrahigh
WSHP
ARI EER[EIR] (85°F, cooling)12.2[0.280]14.0[0.244]
14.3[0.239]
WSHP
ARI COP[EIR] (70°F, heating)4.14[0.242]4.57[0.219]4.70[0.213]
GSHP
NW EER[EIR] (56°F, cooling)15.5 [0.220]20.2[0.169]23.4[0.146]
GSHP
NW COP[EIR] (50°F, heating)3.76[0.266]4.15[0.241]4.30[0.233]

For water source heat pumps utilizing a fluid cooler in the maritime Pacific Northwest, Standard ARI Conditions are recommended with condenser water available at 85°F in the summertime for cooling, and 70°F in the wintertime for heating.

For groundsource heat pumps in the maritime Pacific Northwest, design conditions were estimated to provide 56°F condenser supply water temperature in the summertime for cooling, and 50°F in the wintertime for heating.

Equipment efficiencies are defined for eQuest in terms of the Electric Input Ratio (EIR), which is simply the inverse of the COP. Divide EER by 3.412 to obtain COP.

Compare the above performance numbers with those of the WSEC 2006 and ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G, ... [TBD]

The following manufacturer and equipment model published data was used to compile the above table (note the relative subjectivity of the terms 'standard', 'high' and 'ultrahigh'):

Standard & High-Efficiency: ClimateMaster, Genesis Series, High and UltraHigh Efficiency
Ultrahigh Efficiency: Florida Heat Pump, ES Series, Two Stage R-410A

Monday, March 12, 2007

eQuest Multi-Level Spaces

Topic: Defining eQuest multilevel spaces is relatively simple, but there are a couple of issues to be aware of.

Rule #1: Unless your analysis specifically requires plenums, eliminate them by specifying the floor-to-ceiling height to be the same as the floor-to-floor height on Screen 1 of the shell editing wizard. This simplification will generally prove to be a big time saver going forward.

Rule #2: For atriums and multilevel spaces to be defined properly, the lowest-level shell must be unique. If the "Number of Floors" is greater than 1, you will not have the option of specifying the multilevel space height, as the inputs missing from the dialog box below illustrate by their absence.


Rule #3: Use "Number of Floors" multiplier for identical floors.

The "Zone Characteristics" dialog box above shows multilevel space editing for the multilevel shell, i.e. the "upper floors" from the second on up, which are identical. The image below illustrates how a single shell definition may be used with a floor multiplier of "8" applied. This multi-level shell has been placed "Immediately Above" the lowest level shell.


Rule #4: Elevate the roof of lowest level of the multilevel space, and delete the remaining roofs later in detailed edit mode.

The image above shows part of the roof of the unique lower-level shell, which extends underneath the upper-level shells. The part which is exposed when elevated will become the roof of the multilevel space; the remaining zone roofs for this shell should be removed later in detail edit mode.

The "Zone Characteristics" dialog box above shows multilevel space editing for the lowest level shell. When a constituent zone is specified to be a multilevel space, a shell without a floor multiplier should display a "Conditioned Height" input box. Getting it to appear may require clicking the "Zone Type" drop-down, and changing the space from "Conditioned" to "Unconditioned" and back again.


The image above shows the completed multilevel space, before the application of windows and skylights. Note that the exterior wall was automatically extruded simply by raising the roof.